This month’s Atlantic cover story by Anne-Marie Slaughter has been burning up the wires on every professional woman’s inbox. I received links and commentary from high school, college and business school classmates, colleagues, and board members from New York, Seattle, and London within hours of the article coming online, and forwarded it, as many have - to the high powered women in my life “Read this and thought of you immediately… would love to hear your thoughts”...But why not forward to the high powered men in our lives as well? Or any of the men, for that matter? As Slaughter astutely points out, as does Sheryl Sandberg in her now-famous and heavily referenced Ted Talks and Commencement speech on the issue: this is not a single-gender problem. To clarify, while both Slaughter and Sandberg suggest that a solution would require men to be more proactive in equalizing professional opportunities for women - they agree that such a step is necessary, but not sufficient. After all, what about the men? Do they “have it all”? Perhaps, but I know many men at the top or struggling to get there while balancing their own desires to create meaning at work and in their personal lives, if they even have time for personal lives. The high-intensity lifestyle Slaughter describes, including early calls, late meetings and traveling 4-5 days a week takes its toll on men too. As my mother, an extremely accomplished physician and former head of her hospital’s ER (falls squarely in the ‘superwoman’ category), said in response, “That is NOT a life-style, that is a work-style!” “Women are insane to take on role models who live impossible lives... do you think they have it any better?” What then, is the alternative? We agreed that shifting standards of work/life for both genders closer to Europe’s labor standards might not be desirable, but perhaps there is a middle ground, including some of the flexibility outlined in The Atlantic. However, in the immediate term - especially for the women and men described in article (those with education, income and options), it may come down to crafting a life formed around explicit values, and personal choice. To this point, one of Slaughter's references resonated - the astonishingly honest report from Bronnie Ware, a woman who managed palliative care for years: in it, her summaries of the regrets of the dying. Number 2: “I wish I didn't work so hard.”

She writes “This came from every male patient that I nursed. They missed their children's youth and their partner's companionship. Women also spoke of this regret. But as most were from an older generation, many of the female patients had not been breadwinners. All of the men I nursed deeply regretted spending so much of their lives on the treadmill of a work existence.” This is the data. It is precious knowledge because it is the rule, not the exception, but perhaps it is not true for everyone. Some people will be fortunate enough to find work they are passionate about, a career that provides deep fulfillment - so this is in no a way a judgment on those who place work first, nor is it a universal prescription to solve life’s tensions by working less and spending more time with loved ones. The gold nugget? Number 1: “I wish I'd had the courage to live a life true to myself, not the life others expected of me.”

Ms. Ware writes from years of privileged and compassionate observation, “This was the most common regret of all. When people realise that their life is almost over and look back clearly on it, it is easy to see how many dreams have gone unfulfilled. Most people had not honoured even a half of their dreams and had to die knowing that it was due to choices they had made, or not made.

It is very important to try and honor at least some of your dreams along the way.” For both women and men, perhaps the right question is not how to ‘have it all’ in general, but what ‘having the best for me’ means, specifically, and then going for it. Knowing that there will be trade-offs, and that prioritizing can hurt. We all make choices every day. A dear, double-ivy-league-educated friend said “I also never really bought into the having it all ideal. Mostly because it conjured up images of women in power suits wearing sneakers on the subway... (SHUDDER). So in the meantime I'm just going to set limits with my coworkers and prioritize (family, job, friends- in that order generally but not always).” I revisit Ware’s reflections in this context, because many of the things that bring satisfaction, joy and success, as defined by each individual, can be optimized by that individual. I am in no way dismissing the importance of changing the legal and cultural infrastructure that perpetuate gendered imbalances in opportunity. I applaud Slaughter for adding thoughtful and wise fodder to a conversation that matters, and in doing so, opening her own life to study and critique. I am loving the discussions roiling over twitter, email and across both conference and kitchen tables. I am also actively engaged in professional organizations geared towards women’s advancement, I mentor male and female students, and I write my congressional representatives regularly on these issues. Resolution at a societal level may be a long time coming. In addition to this work, it may be worth pausing to take a hard look at what matters...most, a little closer to home.

_Yesterday Deutsche Bank released an original analysis of over 100 academic studies, comparing the performance of Sustainable Investment opportunities. This paper follows weeks of intensified debate over whether the market for investments with explicit social value attributes will ever take off, and what is needed to unlock the potential so many have been chasing. It’s also timely, as it has been a frustrating couple of years in the investment world, both for “sustainable” and mainstream markets, as discussed in the June CalvertGateways to Impact report, and bemoaned at last month’s SOCAP conference, as well as by sovereign and pension fund investors seeking yield. DB’s analysis doesn’t try to crack the whole nut - but it does give us a level-headed research driven analysis, new vocabulary, and actionable insight which, like many of the best ideas, is surprisingly simple. The key conclusions: Sustainable Investment (specifically, investments scoring high on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) factors) is: 1)Good for Investors… because it consistently result in higher performance. 2)Good for Companies.... because it consistently results in lower cost of capital - both loans, bonds and equity. Therefore sustainability (actually, CSR and ESG) should be the concern of not just the Sustainability Officer and CEO, but also the CFO.This is not entirely surprising, and certainly not a new perspective, but the format of the Deutsche Bank analysis provides fresh tools to advance the conversation. Why this publication matters:

High-Level Analysis - The analysis is a terrific addition to the discourse, because it provides one of the most comprehensive literature reviews to-date, and establishes a framework to compare diverse articles published on the subjects.

Results by Group - The review breaks the world of “sustainable investing” into sub-groups: CSR, ESG and “Socially Responsible Investing” SRI, and evaluates relevant research from each category, analyzing corporate financial performance, cost of capital, and, in the case of SRI, overall fund performance. Grouping these categories shows patterns not entirely visible in any individual study- namely that SRI strategies are NOT correlated with either higher performance or enhanced cost of capital, buthigh marks on CSR, specifically governance issues, are.

Finally, Webster for SI - Two of the most useful pages in the entire paper are the defines sheets – bullet pointing what in the world the difference is between Responsible, Ethical and Sustainable Investment (?!!), and discusses the evolution of each category.

This is basic, but extremely constructive, since any new meme requires time to converge on standard definitions. The loose and interchangeable use of ‘social investment’ vocabulary is in itself a barrier to meaningful communication and can instigate exhaustion and eye-rolling from investors who just want to know what in the world is being discussed. At a minimum, the definitions give investors a menu of concepts with which to frame their objectives.

So what do we take away from this- other than a good high-level view and a little more scaffolding from which to approach these issues? Choose your wordsThe paper addresses the universe of “sustainable investments” – but rightly describes this term as a “catch-all.” The breadth of term and others make it a blunt tool, encompassing too many ideas to communicate effectively, drive decision-making or warrant generalization.For anyone involved in this industry space, it is worth explicitly defining the rationale and mechanics of what is being proposed – as the vocabulary is neither constant nor intuitive, and some strategies are quantitatively more effective than others.Post Crisis analysisThe paper specifically addresses base research pre-2008. It would be worthwhile tracking any longitudinal studies to see whether crisis conditions have exacerbated or reduced the benefits of ‘CSR’ strategies. Sustainability = Long Term Investment MentalityThe positive results found are not related to any specific asset class, investment structure, new market or innovative way of pricing externalities.Rather, the components of sustainability cited sound a lot like common sense long-term investment discipline. Specifically, better corporate performance and lower cost of capital were supported only for CSR and ESG initiatives: “an approach to business that takes into account economic, social, environmental and ethical impacts for a variety of reasons, including mitigating risk, decreasing costs, and improving brand image and competitiveness. This approach is sometimes implemented by means of a comprehensive set of policies and procedures integrated throughout a company, encompassing a wide range of practices, including: corporate governance, employee relations, supply chain relationships, customer relationships, environmental management, philanthropy and community involvement.”So we are talking about investments in corporations which score higher than peers on attributes that “mitigate risk, decrease cost, and improve brand image and competitiveness?” Is anyone surprised that these issues would be correlated with higher performance and lower cost of capital?These issues and the governance and leadership policies described above are core to proper due diligence on any operating company. With the exception of short term arbitrage or volatility trades, I cannot imagine recommending any investment WITHOUT requiring above-average marks on nearly every one. In 2004 the UNEP Finance Initiative posited that “environmental, social and corporate governance issues affect long-term shareholder value…and in some cases those effects may be profound”… In the words of my younger brother – no shit, Sherlock. In a much earlier DB report, Analysts referenced McKinsey CEO Dominic Barton’s ‘Capitalism for the Long Term” - stressing long term strategies as critical for sustained growth. Business strategy is McKinsey's bread and butter - and Barton's suggestions are consistent, albeit broader reaching, with the specific attributes of CSR and ESG highlighted in this week's DB report. The key takeaway assuming a decent buy price: corporations which address a more comprehensive set of long term factors make for better investments, in the long term. Sustainable = long term. This analysis ignores the entire concept of investing in business models which are themselves explicitly sustainable in an environmental or social way, such as renewable energy production, microfinance, or energy efficiency. However, if adding new vocabulary helps us focus on the issues of long term survival - we may end up at the same conclusions, eventually.

Honest Buildings, a building information network, has launched in New York, DC and San Francisco now Seattle, bringing data on over 32,000 new buildings into the public domain.

The platform is a combination of Facebook and LinkedIn for buildings and the people that build, manage, occupy and own them - an entirely new level of access and transparency for real estate. Building 'profiles' can include basic building information: address, photos, square footage, ownership and management details, as well building certifications, regulatory compliance, project specifications and vendor contacts -bringing together information that has historically been extremely difficult to compile, let alone interact with.

What’s exciting about this is that transparency breeds comparison and competition, and over time, competition almost always advances the standards of performance in any industry. As Elizabeth Heider of Skanska is fond of saying (in reference to an internal competition to green office locations, which led to higher ajnd higher levels of LEED certification), “testosterone will save the world”.

While there is always some role for regulation in achieving industry change, it is notoriously hard to figure out how best to regulate an evolving market. Transparency and the resulting competition work faster, cheaper, and don’t carry the pain-in-butt burden of compliance.

Bentham's Panopticon, drawn by Willey Reveley, 1791

Behavior in the Fishbowl Philosopher Jeremy Bentham nailed the behavior-changing power of transparency in his eighteenth century concept of the panopticon - the ‘ideal’ jail building – a circular structure where prisoners, knowing that their behavior could be observed at any time, would self-regulate. But the disciplinary tone applied by both Bentham and, later, Foucault misses out on opportunities.

Information Frees Markets In another context, clear disclosure enables growth: Microfinance as an industry has suffered in recent years due to concerns about opaque and unfairly high prices on financial products for low-income consumers. Rather than mandate and enforce against “usury” rates, governments have partnered with MF Transparency (an NGO bred by the leaders of prior World Bank initiatives and promoted by Nobel Peace Prize recipient, Muhammad Yunus), and major banks to translate pricing into a single standard definition “annual percentage rate” or APR - which can be reported with any other materials the bank offers. MF Transparency works collaboratively with each bank, leading up to an established date in each country, when all participating banks will voluntarily disclose their products’ APR. At this point, since everyone from senior management to line staff knows how to calculate APR, no regulation is required – the customers compare and decide. And for those banks opting not to participate? Well, would you buy a car with no safety rating, or eat at a New York restaurant missing one of Bloomberg’s famous letter grades? The resulting clarity has eased minds and pocketbooks of customers and investors.

Back to buildings- for any of this kind of traction to take hold in a real estate context - accurate information needs to be available, and decision-makers need to begin using it consistently. The current information available on Honest Buildings varies widely between buildings, because users can post as much or as little as they want. However, with well over 400,000 buildings registered less than three months after the firm’s public launch - Honest Buildings is off to a promising start.

As earlier articles have suggested, information and reviews from Honest Buildings may soon become as core to real estate due diligence as Facebook is to dates and Yelp to meals, prompting building owners and operators to do even better than today’s ‘best’ - real estate, after all, tends to cost a lot more than dinner.

Google delivered big news yesterday about maps, just days before Apple’s WWDC conference, also expected to highlight the leaps and bounds in the firm’s own mapping and visualization capabilities. For now, the rundown on Google’s four announcements:

1)3D Cities - Google has launched a full 3D mapping update for Google Earth, which will be available first on mobile applications. The new launch drives at Google’s core principles: comprehensiveness, accuracy and useability, and will fill in many of the gaps in the current coverage. The 3D updates will reach beyond US to the UK and EMEA regions, and by the end of 2012 will cover "metropolitan areas with a combined population of 300 million people".

2) Offline Maps - Users will now be able to download maps to use offline on Android in more than 100 countries in the coming weeks. While not yet available on the iPhone, VP of Engineering Brian McClendon says they aim to offer this on “all devices” soon.

3) Google Earth on Foot - Google is now sending backpack-toting Googlers out to photograph places that aren't accessible to Street View cars, trikes and snowmobiles.

4)12 New Countries - Google is expanding its Map Maker tool to 12 new countries to enable users to help improve the accuracy of its maps.

The biggest splash by far is the introduction of 3D Maps – Google detailed an impressive systematic process: specially contracted airplanes will collect data on cities all over the world. Flying in tight grids at 45 degree angles, the planes will produce images which, combined with Google’s algorithms, will produce maps a step function in accuracy and scale beyond what has previously been available.

Taking a step back , 3D is exciting, and if given a choice more accuracy is typically better, but why does this really matter?Augmented Reality: A New Way of SeeingThe map is just a starting point, a foundation for other layers of user information. “Behind the scenes, this is very valuable for future applications like augmented reality," said Ed Parsons, geospatial technologist at Google, in a detailed interview with The Guardian. "It gives you the ability to attach information to objects in three dimensions." The field of data visualization has blossomed in recent years from the power of just such combinations to deliver deeper insight and help drive complex, multi-factor decisions.

Google’s improved accuracy and more facile interface has the potential to democratize capabilities like those of GIS (Geographic Information Systems). While clunky, expensive and hard to use, GIS has been a pioneer in customizing maps and data visualization for use in real life by enabling users to add and subtract ‘layers’ of information – such as population density, age, river flood patterns, temperature, roads etc.

With examples of maps bringing data to life on themes as diverse as crime, telecom, disaster relief, and dating and obvious applications from urban and infrastructure planning to the consumer experience, this technology becomes more and more relevant.

Google pushes the idea further – raising futuristic scenarios about maps, custom made for the individual, tailored in real-time for the decision or perspective in that moment. Google's Project Glass prototypes, launched earlier this year – position the idea of a map as a product and a service. "We're perhaps getting to the point where every map is unique for every individual for their particular task," said Parsons. "A map I would see might be different to a map you'd see."

Feels like the type of bright new thing which, once in our hands, we won’t be able to live without. Google and Apple are racing to deliver, hoping that is indeed the case.